Guidelines for Supporting a Community of Inquiry through Graded Online Discussion Forums in Higher Education

Abstract

Graded online discussion forums allow students to interact with course content, peers, and instructors. These discussions have the potential to enhance students’ learning experiences significantly. By adding graded online discussions to an online structured Master’s program in Education, it was necessary to determine the value of these discussions and their contribution to creating an online community. The purpose of this study, therefore, was to determine how a community of inquiry could support graded online discussions. The study used the Community of Inquiry theoretical framework as its basis. A qualitative exploratory case study design was used, involving eleven purposefully selected participants who were enrolled for a structured master’s program in Education. Data were collected from two sources: feedback from students on their experiences of the online discussions, and the actual online discussions. The data were analyzed using the six-phase thematic analysis approach following a deductive approach. This study revealed that these discussions supported students’ learning and created an online learning community promoting social, cognitive, and teaching presences. These findings have implications for practice. Firstly, fostering social presence is essential for online discussions because it leads to increased engagement, motivation, a sense of belonging, and collaboration. Secondly, online discussions need to be designed with clear guidelines, structured questions, and discussion opportunities. Lastly, online discussions designed to promote cognitive presence challenge students, encourage debate, and assist them in gaining the needed knowledge and higher order thinking skills. Based on these findings, the unique contribution of this study is to provide guidelines for fostering discussion forum participation within the Community of Inquiry (COI) framework. The suggested guidelines can serve as a resource to facilitate effective graded discussion forums in higher education contexts.

1. Introduction

Online courses have become increasingly popular in recent years due to their flexibility, enabling students to study from anywhere and at any time. Several advantages of online learning have been reported in the literature, including easy accessibility to knowledge, flexibility, proper content delivery, content standardization, personalized instruction, self-pacing, interactivity, and increased convenience [1]. However, while online learning has benefits, it also poses challenges, such as students feeling disconnected and isolated, poor communication, students having difficulty understanding content, connectivity challenges, and mental health issues [2]. Therefore, to build on these benefits and address challenges, it is essential to create a strong sense of community to support students’ learning [3]. One way to do this is through online asynchronous discussions, which can promote engagement and a sense of belonging [4]. Online discussions can promote deep learning by developing skills in asking questions and assessing responses, bridging the communication gap between lecturers, students, and content knowledge [4]. In this regard, a community is crucial for successful online learning. The term online community can be defined as a group of diverse individuals who meet online for a common purpose and engage in learning activities to solve problems or address issues [5]. To achieve their goals, students need to form a community in a communication platform that enables interaction with one another, facilitators, and module content. Being part of a community is integral to the human experience and central to recent learning theories. A learning community is the creation of a sense of belonging by a group of students, where students trust one another, construct knowledge, share useful information, and establish connections by getting to know one another [6]. Therefore, building a learning community should start at the beginning of a course and continue throughout the learning period [7]. Additionally, the authors argue that both students and instructors should be involved in building the learning community. In an effective learning community, learning is negotiated through critical yet constructive communication, and all participants feel respected and safe. Asynchronous, threaded discussions have the potential to effectively create a collaborative learning environment as well as interpersonal and group dynamics [3]. Various factors, including access to technology, student and facilitator attitudes, and openness to the new pedagogy, must be considered when designing discussion forums that promote student–student, student–instructor, and student–content interaction [8]. Online discussions can facilitate the development of skills in asking questions, assessing responses by non-experts and experts, and helping bridge communication gaps between instructors, students, and their content knowledge [9]. Graded discussion forum participation encourages student participation; however, as Mehall [10] rightfully states, it should be carefully designed to match the purpose of the discussion forums and to ensure that the same students do not dominate. Additionally, to report on our research findings and provide guidelines for the design of online graded discussions that support a community of inquiry, it is necessary to understand the importance of the Community of Inquiry (COI) framework, which includes social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence. To reach this goal, we defined the following research question: which guidelines can support a community of inquiry through graded online discussion forums?

1.1. Interaction

The term interaction has been associated with various terms such as cooperation, collaboration, and active learning, and no single definition exists [11]. Moore [12] was the first author to distinguish between three types of interaction: student–content, student–student, and student–instructor interaction. These types of interactions are interconnected and depend on each other. Student–content interaction takes place if students can interact with existing content and create new content and knowledge [12]. We agree with these authors that without this kind of interaction, no learning can occur, and that interaction between students and instructors leads to effective interaction with the content. The third type of interaction, which refers to student–student interaction, affects learning outcomes positively and assists students in gaining social acceptance [13]. The research by Bouhnik and Marcus [14] confirms that one of the most influential features of online courses is the interaction between students through online discussions. The three types of interaction mentioned above are mediated by an underlying online educational platform or technology such as a learning management system that makes online learning possible [15]. These online educational platforms foster an environment conducive to enhanced interaction with students, content, and instructors. Furthermore, interaction is crucial in improving student learning outcomes and satisfaction with online learning [16]. In a study conducted by Baber [17], interaction emerged as the most significant factor influencing students’ perceived learning outcomes and satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic in the realm of online learning [1]. Regular student interaction with fellow students, instructors, and content is fundamental in creating an engaging, supportive, and collaborative learning environment, ultimately enhancing students’ overall learning outcomes and satisfaction.

Interaction, which occurs asynchronously in online learning, needs to be purposeful to yield positive educational outcomes. Through tools such as discussion forums, online chats, and shared spaces, students can participate in collaborative activities, share ideas, and work as a team, which enriches their learning experience [18,19]. However, it is essential to establish pedagogical interventions that elevate student interaction to a state of collaboration rather than simply providing the means for interaction. Online discussion forums are an effective tool in this regard [20], but instructors need to avoid authoritative behavior that can hinder the formation of a learning community. Instead, they should encourage open-ended questions, respect student responses, and create an environment that promotes peer-to-peer collaboration [21,22]. Collaboration within an online discussion forum fosters a cooperative environment where participants actively engage and work together to exchange ideas, share knowledge, and collectively explore topics of interest [23]. Students can gain new insights and expand their knowledge base by sharing diverse perspectives. These discussions prompt students to think critically and analyze different viewpoints. They can develop reasoning and argumentation skills by considering alternative opinions and engaging in discussion forums.

1.2. Interaction and Discussion Forums

Online discussion forums, where students can asynchronously interact with fellow students, their instructors, and the course content, provide a space for students to learn from each other, improve their communication skills, and allow opportunities for student–student, student–instructor, and student–content interaction [24,25]. However, as Fiock [26] cautions, for effective interaction, discussion forums must be carefully designed to promote collaboration, encourage participation, and support the growth of individual students within the community. This can involve strategies such as scaffolding, grading, and careful facilitation to ensure that all students can participate and that the conversation remains focused on the course’s learning objectives.

By using the Community of Inquiry framework for online discussion forums, instructors can create a more engaging and effective learning experience for their students in distance education settings [27]. Online discussion forums are valuable for promoting interaction, collaboration, and learning in distance education settings, and they provide a space for students to learn from each other, improve their communication skills, and develop a sense of community that supports their learning [27,28]. Effective discussion forums involve strategies such as scaffolding, grading, and careful facilitation to ensure that all students have an opportunity to participate and that the conversation remains focused on the course’s learning objective [29,30]. Despite the numerous benefits of online discussion forums, there is little guidance on using them effectively to create a learning community in a symbol-rich, abstract discipline such as ODeL contexts [28,30]. Therefore, this research aims to explore guidelines for supporting a Community of Inquiry through graded online discussion forums.

2. Theoretical Framework

Grounded in Jon Dewey’s practical inquiry, the Community of Inquiry (COI) framework was developed by Garrison, Anderson, and Archer in 2000 [10] and has since been a widely used theory in online learning communities in higher education. Within the framework, students can acquire knowledge by implementing appropriate strategies and effective cognitive and emotional connections [31]. Additionally, students are encouraged to engage in collaborative learning processes, wherein they can articulate and exchange perspectives, tackle complex problems, deliberate on challenging questions, and address diverse academic matters with their peers and instructors [31]. The Community of Inquiry Framework consists of three interdependent core elements: social presence, cognitive presence, and teaching presence, creating a quality educational experience [32,33]. The COI assumes that effective learning in higher education environments depends on developing an online community, consisting of social presence, teaching presence, and cognitive presence as illustrated in Figure 1.

Social presence is the ability of students to project themselves socially and emotionally as real people in a COI [6,34]. It includes open communication with peers and course facilitators and builds student trust [35]. Online interactions with peers might further enhance students’ engagement in learning activities, forming positive relationships with their peers and lecturers [29]. Giacumo and Savenye [36] confirm that social presence could predict the degree of cognitive presence as students in the online community can solve problems, think critically, and achieve their learning objectives. This implies a positive relationship between social and cognitive presence in an online learning community.

Teaching presence refers to the design, facilitation, and direct instruction in teaching and learning [19,24]. It is a critical element in the COI framework as it brings in the instructor’s voice and presence. Although many research studies focus on teaching presence in online discussion forms [37], the instructor’s presence can also be established in other aspects of a course, such as announcements, setting assignments, feedback to students, and related activities [7]. Teaching presence therefore refers to course design, curriculum outline, and teaching methods and is related to students’ evaluation of the quality of their educational experiences [16,38].

Finally, cognitive presence is defined as a cycle of practical inquiry where students move deliberatively from a triggering event to the exploration, integration, and resolution of the event [8,31]. The triggering event provides students with activities related to the inquiry process, while exploration could allow them to brainstorm and discuss the problem. The integration phase involves reflection and integration activities while staying engaged through the process, which should lead to a resolution at the end [39]. By moving through the four phases, students can construct meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in the online environment [40]. The learning contents could encourage students to engage in interactive learning activities for further analyses, discussion, and evaluation and can be highly motivational [41]. Along with the cognitive abilities that students learn, they might also develop higher-order skills such as critical thinking and metacognition [38]. The development of such skills can be developed by strategies such as students’ active participation, encouraging them to ask questions, creating reflection activities, and applying their learning to real-world situations.

Giacumo and Savenye [36] confirm that within the three presences, graded discussion forums encourage student participation and can be used to support the development of learning communities. These learning communities further allow students to collaborate and learn valuable skills such as netiquette and writing [37]. Designing discussion forums that promote student–student, student–lecturer, and student–content interaction is necessary for creating a quality educational experience in online learning. Hence, we found the COI framework and appropriate lens through which discussion forums can be examined in their ability to support the development of an online learning community. Instructors can facilitate meaningful and productive discussions by understanding how to create social, teaching, and cognitive presence. The three presences, as well as their interconnectedness, are illustrated by Garrison et al. [31] as follows:

In the next section, we discuss the methodology used in this research, followed by the presentation and discussion of the findings. Finally, we present a summary of design principles that emerged from our analysis before concluding with suggestions for future research.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Research Design

A research design serves as the blueprint for how the current study was conducted, guiding us as researchers in collecting and analyzing the data to answer the research question. The design and methods for collecting the data are summarized in the table below, and a discussion follows after that.

A qualitative exploratory case study design was used for this study as shown in Figure 2. Reid-Searl and Happel [38] argue that a qualitative exploratory research design allows researchers to explore a topic with limited coverage in the literature. Since we did not find specific information on providing guidelines to support a community of inquiry through graded online discussion forums, we believe this design was most suitable.

Case studies as a type of qualitative research are primarily used in the social sciences and were found to be especially valuable in practice-oriented fields such as education [40]. We were interested in an in-depth exploration from multiple perspectives of the complexity and uniqueness of a particular case [41], which is online graded discussions by a specific group of students.

3.2. Research Participants and Selection

In this case study, eleven participants were enrolled in a compulsory module of a structured master’s program in education. These participants were purposefully chosen based on their lived experiences of actively participating in online graded discussions [42]. Nine participants were first-year students, while the remaining two were second-year students. Among the participants, six were male, and five were female. After completing the module, the students were asked to write reflections on their learning during online discussions. The purpose of their feedback served a dual objective. Firstly, they aimed to provide valuable feedback to the lecturers regarding the students’ experiences. Secondly, they served to identify areas for improvement in teaching and learning, enhancing the overall educational process.

3.3. Data Collection

For data collection, two sets of documents were utilized in this study. The first set consisted of the feedback provided by the students regarding their experiences in the online discussions. This structured Master’s in Education program consisted of four taught modules following the same structure, followed by a research project. The modules were offered on the Moodle learning management system, and the online discussions were all graded. Each discussion comprised four topics or questions based on the content covered in the study units. Assessment criteria were clearly stated and referred to the length, the number of posts, the content, and interaction with the lecturer and fellow students. The online graded discussions took place from May to November. The number of posts in each discussion varied, ranging from 110 to 140.

Students had to participate in six online graded discussions, two written assignments, and a summative, reflective portfolio to complete the modules successfully. As part of this portfolio, students had to complete a section on their experiences in the online discussions. This section consisted of three questions referring to their growth, learning, and interaction with fellow students and lecturers. Student responses made up the first and primary set of our data. The second data set, which was used for triangulation purposes, encompassed the actual online discussions of the module. While Noble and Heale [43] state that triangulation helps to increase the credibility of research, Bans-Akutey and Tiimub [44] add that it helps to confirm the research findings, and helps to provide more insights that help the researcher to explain the phenomenon better. In our case, triangulation was used for all the above reasons in order to strengthen the research findings.

3.4. Data Analysis

The data collected in this study were analyzed using thematic analysis, explicitly employing a deductive approach guided by our theoretical framework. As indicated in Figure 2, the researchers followed the six-phase thematic analysis approach proposed by Braun and Clarke [44]. Thematic analysis involves several steps to identify and analyze patterns, themes, and insights within the collected data. The specific details of each phase, such as familiarization with the data, generating initial codes, searching for themes, reviewing themes, defining, and naming themes, and producing the final report, were followed during the analysis process [44]. By adopting this deductive method and following the six-phase approach of thematic analysis, the researchers were able to systematically analyse and interpret the data, allowing for the identification of key themes and patterns related to the research objectives [45].

3.5. Trustworthiness

This study ensured trustworthiness through member checking, which involved sharing the research findings and interpretations with the participants [45]. Engaging in member checking provided an opportunity for the participants to review and validate the accuracy of the collected data [45]. Additionally, participants were given the chance to provide feedback on the interpretations made by the researchers. By actively engaging the participants in the verification and interpretation process, this study exemplifies a dedicated commitment to accurately representing their perspectives and experiences. As highlighted by Mazzolini and Maddison [33], incorporating participant feedback in qualitative research enhances the study’s rigor and trustworthiness. In this study, we sent the findings and the discussion of the findings to the participants for their input and feedback. Participants verified the accuracy of the data, and none had additional comments or suggestions for correction.

3.6. Ethical Considerations

Ethical issues refer to the set of rules that distinguish right from wrong and ensure that researchers take moral responsibility in the treatment of research participants [46]. For this reason, participants gave consent to participate in this study before the study commenced. Furthermore, participation was voluntary, and participants were assured that their identity would not be disclosed and that data would be treated anonymously. Lastly, ethical approval for the study was obtained, and the study was conducted in accordance with the guidelines and principles of ethical research (certificate number: 2018/10/17/1131109/20/MC).

4. Findings

Eleven participants shared their experiences and learning in the graded online discussions. Their profiles and participant numbers as indicated in

Table 1. Participant profiles.

Participant	First/Second Year	Male/Female
P1	First	F
P2	Second	M
P3	First	M
P4	Second	F
P5	First	F
P6	First	M
P7	First	M
P8	First	F
P9	First	F
P10	First	M
P11	First	M

below, are as follows:

We followed Braun and Clarke’s six-phase approach in analyzing the data. We worked deductively by looking for responses correlated with the Community of Inquiry framework. Three themes and their sub-themes were identified and are presented in the

Table 2. Themes and sub-themes.

Themes	Sub-Themes
Social Presence	Lively debates Collaboration and being part of a learning community
Teaching Presence	Clearly stated guidelines Highly structured content
Cognitive Presence	Learning journey

below.

4.1. Theme: 1 Social Presence

The first theme that emerged was related to how students felt about their presence and their engagements with fellow students and their lecturers.

The students had lively debates, evident from the number of posts in each discussion, ranging from 110 to 140. The active discussions were also confirmed in the students’ feedback. As an example, one student said, “there was no shortage of discussion in this module”, and added that fellow students openly engaged, responded, and acknowledged each other’s ideas (P11). They could “share perspectives” and provide explanations when fellow students and lecturers asked follow-up questions (P3). They showed their presence by indicating they had to attend to the lecturer’s and fellow students’ posts. For example, a participant stated, “I checked regularly for responses by the instructor and students and responded when needed. I know them all, and this motivated me to stay engaged” (P10). This comment confirmed that the discussion forum created a sense of belonging and promoted engagement, as confirmed by Banna et al. [4]. In addition, the study by Al-dheleai [32] concluded that students believed that online discussions were a place where they established a sense of belonging to the online community with close relationships with their instructors and fellow students. They added that they were able to express themselves and share experiences and stories freely.

From their responses, it also became clear that both the second-year students knew how to engage by stating that it was their second year of study, and they started by knowing what to do (P2, P4). One of them confirmed that s/he started “on a high note” because the discussion forum environment was familiar (P2). The online discussions confirmed this trend, as it appeared that the second-year students were the first ones to post their responses to the instructors’ questions.

Students mentioned collaboration and being part of a learning community as a characteristic of the discussions. They confirmed that the discussions as a collaborative experience enabled them to learn by changing some of their initial thoughts because of the posts and responses from peers. In this regard, Ghazal et al. [21] confirm that collaboration cultivates a synergistic environment, empowering students to engage and mutually enrich their learning experiences actively. As an example, a student said,

“The discussions have been constructive in my learning. First, it defeated the notion of non-collaborative learning opinionated by those against distance and online learning, which I was equally skeptical about at the onset”.

(P6)

The fact that students put in the effort to respond to each other’s posts was mentioned, and students appreciated the fact that others responded to their posts. This shows that students in this module were able to build a strong sense of community to support their learning [28]. A participant explained it as follows:

“Right from the outset, there was engagement: questions were being asked, and comments were being made on everyone’s posts. To me, this suggested that our posts were really being scrutinized—read with interest and intent by our peers. When you realize that your fellow students are taking the time to acknowledge your efforts and ask questions, it becomes even more important to respond. I believe this happened. Although some students were more prolific in their postings than others, I received at least one comment or question from each of the members of our group—for me, this established a real sense of community and investment in the process that I had not previously experienced”.

(P4)

The fact that students appreciated the collaboration and the fact that they could learn from others in different contexts became clear. In this regard, Stephens and Roberts [23] state that collaboration has the potential to engage students in learning activities, form positive relationships with their peers, and improve student outcomes. The online discussions confirmed that students, in general, first responded to the instructor’s questions, and thereafter they responded to their fellow students’ posts by asking follow-up questions or adding additional comments to share similar or opposite experiences with fellow students. By online communication, students were therefore able to create an online learning community. They learned from each other by responding to their fellow students’ posts and, in many cases, showed appreciation for new insights. As an example, a student stated the following in the feedback: “Since the beginning, it has become a collaborative experience where much of my thoughts were changed by what I read and from engagement with my peers and lecturers” (P7).

The above comments align with the research of Zhang et al. [20], emphasizing that a learning community should be established from the course’s inception and maintained throughout its entirety.

4.2. Theme: 2 Teaching Presence

This theme focused on the module’s design, facilitation, and direct instruction.

Initially, some first-year students had difficulty and only better understood what was expected after the feedback on the first discussions. This could have been because instructions were unclear or because students were unfamiliar with the online teaching and learning environment. As an example, a student said,

“On my first discussion, I did contribute, although I didn’t do much because I did not understand the module properly and how to respond to other students’ posts. As it was my first time doing studies online, I feel I have tried. The problem I noticed after the feedback from the facilitator on grading was that I was not consulting enough sources to support my arguments. I just made some general comments”.

(P9)

The above comments confirm that the move from a face-to-face to an online teaching and learning environment can be daunting for students, and lecturers should provide the needed guidelines and support. Although this was given in the feedback, guidelines could have been of more value if students had been aware of them before they started with a module. In this regard, the same participant acknowledged that s/he learned from the feedback provided:

“I started to follow the guidelines from the feedback on what I must do to earn better marks and improve my posts. My reading in the lessons improved, and I managed to find the correct journals to use. The information from the discussions with my fellow students also assisted me”.

(P9)

The module site showed that the discussions had clearly stated assessment criteria, but they might not have been adequate, or adequately emphasised. In this regard, Mehall [10] confirms that online discussions should be carefully designed to serve their purpose. Furthermore, when designing online discussions, the number of questions must be considered and needs to be aligned with the required number of notional hours for a specific module and level. Although this could have been considered in this module, two students experienced the number of posts being challenging. As an example, one participant said,

“The one drawback of the discussions was the number of posts and trying to keep track of all the discussions. In this way, it is important to continually participate in the discussions so that nothing is missed” (P7). The number of posts in each of the discussions (ranging from 110–140) showed that the eleven students were active, and the number of posts might have been demanding for some. However, the assessment guidelines in the discussion forum provided guidelines of 8–12 posts per discussion. From the discussions, it became clear that some of the active students had more than the recommended number of posts.

The fact that the discussions were highly structured in a certain way showed teaching presence. In this regard, a student attributed the success of his discussions to the clarity and quality of the instructions:

“I attribute the consistency and success of my contributions to the discussions to the clarity and quality of instructions the course instructors gave each time a question or instruction was posted. Also, the discussions were relevant to both theory and practice. I found them intellectually stimulating and valuable to my academic and career pursuits, so I pushed beyond my limit (competing demands) to contribute and learn from my peers, instructors, and literature”.

(P6)

In this regard, Fiock [26] confirms that in establishing a teaching presence in online course design, activities need to be carefully planned.

Related to the structure of the discussion feedback, a participant said,

“The format that the facilitator adopted was also something I appreciated this year—instead of only responding individually, there was also ‘collective’ feedback provided, often with a follow-up question. Seeing a brief summation of all the contributions up to that point in the forum offered valuable insights. It framed the ‘new’ question posed: either to the group as a whole or to an individual student. These new questions then required us to go back and add to, or clarify, our initial post or address an entirely different aspect of the original question”.

(P1)

Students further shared that the discussions assisted them with their assignment preparation. For example, a student said, “Because the group discussions covered all of the topics, it was easy for me to do my two written tasks as well as the portfolio” (P3).

4.3. Theme 3: Cognitive Presence

The final theme refers to how students can construct meaning through sustained reflection and discourse in the online environment. This theme came out strong, which did not come as a surprise, as the question we asked was about students’ learning from the discussions.

Students admitted that participating in the discussions was a learning journey and that their posts improved over the year. The discussions showed improvement with regard to insights, as well as their confidence. While students were, in many cases, hesitant to ask questions that required critical thinking (typically “how”, “what”, and “why” questions), this became more evident in the course of the year. Consequently, participants showed a deeper understanding of the content. As an example, a participant said,

“My initial posts needed more depth as there was no connection to concepts from learning materials. As a result, the concepts needed to address all components within a given discussion. Moving on, my discussions improved as I could now reflect on the discussion prompts as set out in the questions. I also demonstrated an understanding of the material by posting meaningful questions to group members” (P1). The response from this participant shows how cognitive presence was established through the four phases, as indicated by Garrison et al. [30]. The first phase, which is the triggering event, included the questions that were asked by the instructor, requiring students to recognise the problem posed to them. This led to the need to read relevant content and materials provided to them in the lessons and discussion forums before they could contribute to the discussions. Integration, the third phase, requires convergence among the community members through further discussion, the connection of ideas, and the posting of answers and conclusions [30]. The last phase, resolution, is where students apply the knowledge to their own contexts and are able to justify their responses and choices. From the discussion forum questions, it was clear that questions referred to both theory and practice and required them to refer to their own contexts.

With reference to his/her own growth over the year, and how the different phases contributed to cognitive presence, another student said,

“I struggled to start a debate; I battled with referencing; and doubted my work initially, but I learned a lot and developed critical discussion and research skills along the road. From the beginning until the end of the discussions, I received positive feedback from my peers and the lecturers, which motivated me to read more thoroughly and respond to different questions”.

(P3)

In line with the above comment, Hu et al. [39] confirm that along with cognitive abilities students learn in online discussions, they learn higher order thinking skills such as critical thinking. In their feedback in this study, participants referred to specific knowledge and skills that they gained, which aligns with a statement made by Stronge [9] that online discussions have the potential to develop skills in asking questions and assessing responses, promoting deeper learning, and bridging communication gaps. As an example, students referred to the improvement of their thinking skills. A participant stated, “The discussions increased my thinking skills because I was able to come up with fresh ideas as I engaged with other students and the lecturers” (P1).

The fact that students gained more research skills and improved their reading skills was also mentioned. One participant stated that he learned to do more reading before participating in the discussions. He elaborated by stating, “I believe I learn better with discussions because everyone does research and lots of reading before posting and participating in discussions” (P2).

When referring to his learning, another participant stated:

“My self-confidence grew because of the group discussions. All of the questions posed during the discussions aided in the development of my problem-solving and decision-making abilities. This module’s discussions inspired me to learn from other students and to explain course content in my own terms. I enhanced my research and referencing skills by participating in group discussions”.

(P3)

While cognitive presence refers to how students can construct and confirm meaning through reflection and discussion, developing self-confidence, problem-solving abilities, and decision-making skills requires active engagement. From the participants’ responses, it became clear that they developed such skills.

5. Conclusions

This study aimed to explore guidelines for supporting a community of inquiry through graded online discussion forums. The Community of Inquiry framework, developed by Garrison et al. [31], was used as a theoretical framework to support the study. The framework is the process of creating a meaningful learning experience through the development of social, teaching, and cognitive presences. These three presences are interdependent, and together, they contribute to student–student, student–instructor, and student–content interaction. The research findings showed that in the graded online discussions, social presence was established through lively debates and collaboration, empowering students to engage and mutually enrich their learning experiences. Teaching presence focused on course design, which showed that although some students were unsure of how to approach the discussions leading to good results, the guidelines and feedback from the instructor assisted them in improving, which led to student success. Findings also revealed that the number of posts was sometimes overwhelming, and it was difficult to keep track of all discussions. Lastly, cognitive presence was established through growth, sustained reflection, and discussion. Students acknowledged that their posts improved as they gained a deeper understanding of the content and materials and were able to adequately respond to questions and prompts from the instructor and fellow students. The four phases of cognitive presence, according to Garrison et al. [30], was also evident in participants’ learning journey.

The findings of this study have certain implications. Firstly, fostering social presence is essential for online discussions because it leads to increased engagement, motivation, a sense of belonging, and collaboration among students and between students and instructors. Secondly, online discussions need to be designed with clear guidelines, structured questions, and discussion opportunities. Instructors need to be present from the start of the modules to guide and support students. Lastly, online discussions designed to promote cognitive presence challenge students, encourage debate, and assist them in gaining the needed knowledge and higher order thinking skills.

Our research findings reveal that, in general, the discussion forums supported learning and that students felt connected to this community through communication with both their instructor and fellow students.

Lastly, from the findings, our research suggests the following guidelines for graded online discussions:

• The study revealed that some participants were initially not sure how to approach the online discussions. Therefore, instructors should not assume that students know how to participate in graded discussions. Therefore, instructors could provide comprehensive guidelines and schedule a synchronous online meeting before discussions start to guide students from the beginning of the module.
• Participants in this study revealed that they followed assessment guidelines and were encouraged to improve their marks in the discussions. For this reason, grading of discussions is encouraged to create participation and learning opportunities.
• Participants in the study appreciated the highly structured graded online discussions. Hence, discussions should be structured to guide and engage students.
• Participants in this module were part of a small group, and they all knew each other, which created a community of trust and safety, and encouraged participation. For this reason, instructors are encouraged to divide modules with high student numbers into smaller groups if needed.
• Participants indicated that they were dependent on the presence of the instructor for guidance, feedback, and motivation. For this reason, the instructor should be present and actively involved in the module from the beginning until the end.
• Lastly, the findings indicated that the online discussions supported learning by creating a community of inquiry. It is therefore recommended that instructors consider creating a social, teaching, and cognitive presence when designing and facilitating online graded discussions.

6. Limitations

We acknowledge that this study has limitations. Firstly, this study was limited to eleven master’s students enrolled in one graduate program and actively engaged in threaded graded discussions. Although there is no consensus on the number of participants in qualitative research, and suggestions for case studies vary from a single case to twenty [41], we acknowledge that the findings and conclusions derived from this study cannot be generalized to other populations or educational settings.

Secondly, the responses were part of students’ formal assessments, and they were not anonymous. If they had to respond anonymously in, for example, an online survey, responses might have been different. However, we believe this study contributed by sharing the findings based on students’ in-depth feedback and discussion posts. This study was exploratory in nature, therefore, considering the value graded online discussions can add to student learning, more research is needed. Specifically, research on how instructors incorporate graded online discussions to strengthen their teaching and learning in similar and different contexts is needed. Amongst others, this implies further research in undergraduate courses and modules with large student numbers.